The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:merge first, delete the others. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 10:52, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge/delete per WP:SMALLCAT, this is a tree of 12 categories which all together contain just one article. In addition it is anachronistic, Valencian Community is a modern subdivision of Spain. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:27, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete certainly. 12 categories to support one article is grossly OTT. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:14, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:no consensus to merge. I think renaming the category is advisable; however, there was no discussion of User:BrownHairedGirl's suggestion of renaming to Category:Children's rights authorities, so any name change would have to be handled via another discussion. -- Black Falcon(talk) 18:16, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@BrownHairedGirl: You may be right that children's commissioners in the UK are not exactly ombudsmen (i.e. more than ombudsmen). In that case the second option that I mentioned, to nominate Category:Children's Ombudsmen for merging into this category, may be more suitable. After all, most of Category:Children's Ombudsmen consists of the British children's commissioners. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:55, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle: that sounds like a better option, and I'd be happy to support it ... but it would need a separate nomination. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 01:43, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:delete and salt. – FayenaticLondon 12:31, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: these categories were deleted at WP:CfD 2010 March 7, after a very long series of CfDs in which it was repeatedly agreed that centuries are a spectacularly useless way of dividing sportspeople.
en.wp's articles on sportspeople overwhelmingly relate to people active in the 20th and 21st centuries. It's hard to think of a more useless way of splitting this set than by a single timepoint which creates significant overlap.
By-century categories seem to be a magnet for some editors, so I propose WP:SALT these categories to prevent re-creation. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 19:12, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the 2009/10 discussions for individual sports
Delete all. I could perhaps see the worth of categories for sportspeople by century or decade of birth (which is how the relevant stub categories are often divided), but the current scheme seems pretty useless. Grutness...wha? 01:05, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt -- these seemed in 2010 to be an attempt have a past/current split, which we do not allow. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:16, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Hugo999: this is a proposal to delete, not merge, so nothing will be dumped. The Olympic competitors should be nominated in a separate followup nomination. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 03:28, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Subfields of economics is more general and can include more subjects. Golopotw (talk) 13:48, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Question@Golopotw: which subcategories might be additionally put in this category after renaming? Marcocapelle (talk) 07:20, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps merge to Category:Economics. I do not quite see why subdisciplines should come directly under the main one. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:30, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
rename per nom 'subfields' is a good choice, to match up with other similar social science categories here Hmains (talk) 05:41, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT Small one-county community with just 2 entries. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:13, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oops! I have gone ahead and fixed the nomination....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:31, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
